Subscribe to the IHARE Blog

Rachel Maddow

What Do Seth Rich and the Ukraine Have in Common? Answer: Sean Hannity

October 6, 2019
by Peter Feinman
A beautiful mind can connect dots that do not even exist (https://i.imgflip.com/2fg4dr.jpg)

Sean Hannity has a beautiful mind. His skill in connecting the dots is unrivaled. If there was a Nobel Prize for connecting the dots, he would be the winner.

Who can forget his performance in the Story of Seth Rich? Night after night, week after week, month after month, duped-by-Russia Hannity would regale his rapt audience with the story of how this murdered individual that no one had ever heard of was the critical lynch-pin to exposing the evil shenanigans of the Democrats and the Deep State to undo the legitimately-elected President.

In his performance, duped-by-Russia Hannity was insistent, consistent, and persistent. In the time Rachel Maddow would have spent on one of her long opening essays before getting to the point, duped-by-Russia Hannity would have delivered his message multiple times. All the pieces fit together. All the dots were connected. Buckle up and hear the truth.

There was only one slight problem with duped-by-Russia Hannity’s performance – there was no truth to it. The unfortunate murder of this individual who happened to have worked for the Democratic Party was one of the chance events that sometimes occur in the big city. It was not part of some Jason-Bourne-007-Jack-Clancy intrigue….unless you wanted it to be.

Russia wanted it to be. Give credit where credit is due. The Russian “KGB” quickly seized on this seeming minor event and made it into a political thriller. According to the “real story,” Seth Rich was on his way to talk to the FBI about corruption by the Clintons when he was gunned down by a squad of assassins working for them. It was right there on the web. You could read it for yourself. The alt-right did. So did Fox. What was the source of the story? The Russian “KGB.”  Fox had been duped.

What are the lessons to be learned from this experience?

1. The Russian “KGB” is very good. It responded very quickly and very decisively to concoct a story and to disseminate it on the web. It “proved” that the alleged Russian collusion was really Democratic Party dirty tricks led by Crooked Hillary. These actions demonstrated a familiarity with the American political arena, the willingness to act in it surreptitiously, and the skill to do so successfully.

2. It also demonstrated a technique that the Russians would use again and again to meddle in American politics. It succeeded in duping Hannity because it gave him exactly what he wanted. The Russians knew their audience. They crafted a story that appealed to the conspiracy people eager for a story that confirmed all there predispositions. The Seth Rich story did exactly that.

So why not use that approach again?

The Russians did with the Steele Dossier. That really had originated as a Democratic-funded initiative to get dirt on the Republican opponent. In effect, the Democratic Party had broadcast exactly what it wanted. The effort made clear it was looking for precisely the kind of information that would undermine the political prospects of the Republican candidate.

Guess what the Democrats got in the Steele Dossier?

The Steele Dossier provided the Democrats with exactly the information they wanted. The Steele Dossier was nothing if not dirt on THE DONALD. If the allegations made in the Steele Dossier were true, they would be more than embarrassing, they might even prove fatal. Now the Democrats had been duped.  How much time was spent on the elusive and illusory meeting in Prague? And what about Carter Page?

The Democrats had been played by the Russian “KGB” just as the alt-right, Fox, and duped-by-Russia Hannity had been. Remember how Democrats were practically foaming at the mouth in anticipation of a great victory by destroying THE DONALD thanks to the Steele Dossier. How did that work out? Not so well for the Democrats. As it turns out, they were just as eager to believe what they wanted to believe as duped-by-Russia Hannity was.

The Russians were not done. Why not try offering dirt to THE DONALD on Crooked Hillary? We do not know what “dirt” the Russian “KGB” had manufactured in this effort. It does not seem to have amounted to much. But the words of the son who is not the sharpest knife in the drawer says it all: “I love it!” Although this particular gambit failed, it highlighted the validity of the Russian effort to manipulate the American election: give the people what they want and they will run with it even when there is no truth to it whatsoever.

The Ukraine is the final example of this approach…at least so far. The Ukraine maneuver suits Putin’s needs. It assigns the blame for the intervention into the American Presidential election to his enemy the Ukrainians. Therefore the sanctions levied against Russia should be removed and Russia should be restored to its rightful place in the world just as his American asset has been trying to do. The Ukrainian ploy solves the problems of both leaders. It legitimizes the election of the current present and gets the Russian leader off the hook. All the problems are due to the Ukrainians. Seth Rich lives. The Steele Dossier is accurate. The Americans have been played.

Putin was a former KGB agent. How long do you think it took him size up THE DONALD? How long did it take the alpha male to recognize that the immature-child American President was a submissive, simpleminded, ignoramus? If your answer was more than a nano-nano second, then you are not fit to write about American politics and should never be invited as a talking head on a TV or radio show.  Putin does not watch Fox, he dupes Fox. He quickly realized that the weak, superficial, narcissist was a person he could manipulate. Russia did not intervene in the American election, it was the Ukraine.

There are consequences to being the victim of the Putin’s ploys. For Fox, it is being sued by the Rich family. For the Democrats, it was following a bogus trail and undermining the Mueller report. For THE DONALD it was being impeached and watching his whole stack of lies being undone. The drones used to bomb the Saudi oilfields did not cost much. Neither did Russia have to spend much to totally disrupt the American political process. Who knew it would be that easy?

Will the Democrats Learn from the British Ambassador and Duped-by-Russia Hannity? Probably Not

July 14, 2019
by Peter Feinman

How do you handle an immature child? For a parent coping with an immature and biological child, the task is a daunting one. One must be on constant alert. It is a time-consuming task. One never knows when the immature child will erupt. One never knows when the immature child will cross a line that is not supposed to be crossed. One never knows when the immature child will wreak havoc.

The challenge is even greater when that immature child is in the body of an adult. Think of a high school or college reunion. Somewhere in the crowd there will be that one person who never outgrew college, who never out grew high school, who never outgrew junior high school. He (or sometimes, she) will still act as the 7th grade smart-aleck-dumb-aleck he was back when he was 13. He may have an adult job, be a spouse and a parent, and normally behave like an adult, but there are those moments, especially when the group dynamic kicks in, when he will be the same immature child he was back when he was 13….and now there is no one to send him to the principal’s office…until he actually breaks the law.

Fred Trump knew he had a problem with Little Donnee Wanee. When the immature child was 13, the father placed him a military school in the vain hope that he would grow up. It did not work. Then he spent good money after bad in the vain attempt that the immature child would succeed as an adult businessperson. That was the equivalent of $413 million down the drain. Instead Little Donnee Wanee became the biggest financial loser in American history.

Still, give credit where credit is due. He was always able to con someone into thinking he was really an adult. He created the character of The Donald to act in political professional wrestling arenas and in phony-baloney reality shows and he convinced many people that The Donald was a real person and not just a disguise.

However, there came a time when he had to function in the real world, in the world of adults, in the world that does not watch Fox. And there he had a problem. Pretty much every with whom he had to work on an adult level quickly realized that Little Donnee Wanee was not an adult, he was an immature child.

In this regard, he was no Tom Hanks (Tom Hanks versus Our Immature Child-President). When 13-year old Tom Hanks became big, he was a level-headed kid. He could read a book. He could explain algebra to an even younger child. He could converse with adults on some topics without coming across as a simple-minded child repeating the few words he knew in an almost airhead manner.

But what was the job Tom Hanks had when he was big? His job was to play like a child which he still was and then to report his insights to adults. He was not put in charge of anything. He did not have an administrative job. He did not have an executive job. If he had been placed in such a position, the scam of adulthood would have been exposed. He would have been revealed as a child posing as an adult.

Something similar happened with the world’s worst manager. The same person who bankrupted an airline, who bankrupted a casino, who bankrupted a hotel, now became the person in the office where the buck stops. His management skills have been on display after a hurricane in Puerto Rico (is that in America?) and on the border. He is just as incapable as President as he was in business. However, in business he realized that he could make money branding himself while outsourcing all the building to others. That option does not exist for the President.  As we now commemorate the 50th anniversary of the landing on the moon, we should realize that if Little Donnee Wanee had been president then we never would have gotten there.

Sometimes the adults in the room tried to contain him as president. They would ignore his directives, remove documents from his desk, and pray that no one took him seriously. Sometimes because he is an immature child with limited attention span those efforts succeeded. Sometimes they did not.

From time to time, various reports would emerge that documented his immaturity, his ignorance, his ineptness. Books would be written about him. Anonymous articles would be published. Baby Donnee Wanee blimps would be flown.

Most recently British Ambassador Kim Darroch was exposed as having told the truth about our immature child president. He wrote the ineptitude and incompetence of the chaotic administration. The administration of Little Donnee Wanee would always be dysfunctional, unpredictable, faction-ridden, clumsy and inept.

The temper tantrums would never cease. There would always be another hissy-fit tweet. Perhaps if Britain had deployed its air forces more effectively George Washington would have been defeated and there never would have been a United States. If we had remained a British colony just a little longer until granted independence, there would have been no need for Canada to burn the White House.

The immature child responded to this exposure exactly as one would expect him to: by proving it true.  The same may be said for his reaction to the pre-publication excerpts from Paul Ryan’s new book. The same may be anticipated for every book to be written about him save for those from one of the Flying Monkeys sworn to take a bullet on behalf of the Wicked Witch of the White House.

In so doing, Little Donnee Wanee also has made it clear what ticks him off the most. When he is exposed as being an immature child trying to pass for an adult he goes ballistic. He erupts. Every time. He fixates on the charges. It consumes him. No matter where in the world he is or what he is doing, if someone challenges him on being the 5 “I” president (an inept, incompetent, immature, illegitimate, idiot), he will drop everything to unleash a hissy-fit tweet.

HELLO Democrats! Are you listening? Are you paying attention? He has broadcast what unnerves him the most. He has shown what gets under his skin. He has shown what rattles him. He hates it when people disparage and make fun of him for being an immature child trying to pass for an adult. It is his Achilles’ heel.

Meanwhile, here we are four years after he descended on the staircase and Democrats still do not have a nickname for him. How is it possible that after years of Little Donnee Wanee assigning insulting nicknames to people, the Democrats do not have a standard slew of names for Bonepsur Boy, for Swamp Builder, for the World’s Worst Manager, for America’s Biggest Financial Loser Ever, for Longtime Democrat and Clinton Supporter, for Our Immature Child President?

The Democrats need to go to the Duped-by-Russian Hannity School of Professional Political Wrestling. Put aside for the moment the individual policies he supports or actions he recommends. Focus instead on the techniques he uses to communicate those policies and actions. Recognize his skill in delivering his message. Observe his methods. Note his success. Remember, Duped-by-Russia Hannity convinced his viewers on the basis on absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Seth Rich was the murdered leaker of DNC emails in 2016. It was “the single biggest fraud, lies, perpetrated on the American people by the media and the Democrats in our history” until, of course, the Deep State conspiracy which is about to be exposed and the real colluders and obstructionists are about to reap their just punishment.

WAKE UP AND LEARN FROM THE MASTER!

Duped-by-Russia Hannity
(NICHOLAS KAMM)

Duped-by-Russia Hannity employs several tried and true techniques in the delivery of his message. He is relentlessly on message. He is persistent. He is rigorously repetitive. Sometimes it is hard to tell what day, week, month, or year it is from his monologue since he persistently uses the same words and phrases. If you had a dollar for every time he referred to the “angry Democrats” on Mueller’s team you could retire. Democratic paid for Steele dossier. Unverified Steel dossier. FISA abuses. CORRUPT. CORRUPT. CORRUPT. The biggest corruption scandal in American history. And the guilty ones are panicking now because it is all about to be exposed. Wait till the Flying Monkeys in Congress get through with life-long Republican and decorated-Marine Mueller. It is the Deep State that really is on trial now.

Need-less-to-say, the Democrats have nobody comparable to Duped-by-Russia Hannity. There is no cable host who even comes close to matching him. Lawrence O’Donnell tries but he is no Duped-by-Russia Hannity. And by the time Rachel Maddow has finished one of her essays, Duped-by-Russia Hannity has unleashed a string of assaults that if you missed them then you can tune in tomorrow because he will repeat them. And why Chris Cuomo thinks he is obligated to provide equal time to people who already have a propaganda network is a mystery.

The British Ambassador has exposed the Achilles’ heel of Little Donnee Wanee.

Duped-by-Russia Hannity has developed the weapon to be deployed in such a situation.

The Democrats have been shown what the vulnerability is. The Democrats have been shown how to wield the weapon for the kill. The only question is will the Democrats ever seize the moment. I say, “no.” It will remain a party of no imagination, no metaphors, no story to tell, and no message to thrust again and again into the weak spot of its immature narcissistic foe.

How Nancy Pelosi Helped Elect Donald Trump: A Tale of Two Women

January 7, 2019
by Peter Feinman
Nancy Pelosi, August 18, 2011 (https://www.realclearpolitics.com)

Several years ago, Rachel Maddow, MSNBC, devoted the opening segment of her show to government shutdowns. She was interested to know why the federal government always seemed to be shut down, on the verge of a shutdown, or threatened with a shutdown. She traced the cause to a group of RHINO Representatives then called “Tea Party” and now called “Freedom Caucus.”

Her examination led her to the conclusion that these representatives came from districts where they did not have to worry about Democratic candidates. I do not recall if she used the word “gerrymander” in her analysis, but what she did was to compare the state vote totals for Representatives with the actual allocation of Representatives for the state. As best I can recall she used the three states of Michigan, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania for her data set. What she found in each case was that the number of Republicans elected was disproportionately higher than the statewide Republican vote. The result was the proliferation of these RHINOs who were rambunctious, disruptive, and uppity leading to government shutdowns.

Her analysis stopped there. Let’s examine what she omitted.

WHY DOES THE MORE REPUBLICAN A DISTRICT IS MEAN THE LESS THE REPRESENTATIVE ADMIRES LINCOLN?

Just because a district is primarily Republican in its demographics should not necessarily mean its representatives are people of malice who despise or do not admire Abraham Lincoln. How come the first Republican President and Mount Rushmore President is not a hero to the RHINOs from Republican districts? What about Teddy Roosevelt? What about Dwight D. Eisenhower? What about Ronald Reagan? Nancy Pelosi on the floor of the House recently quoted Reagan on immigration to deafening silence from Republicans. She demonstrated that Republicans have abandoned not just Lincoln but Reagan, too. After all, a Republican who could win in California is of no interest to Republicans today.

WHY ISN’T THE CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS UPPITY?

The Congressional Black Caucus is about equal in size to the RHINO Freedom Caucus. To the best of my knowledge, its members never worry about Republican Party opposition candidates. Their seats are as safe and secure as those of the RHINO Freedom Caucus. Members can hold them for decades and sometimes even bequeath them as a legacy. Maxine Waters may be colorful may she is not uppity like the RHINO Freedom Caucus. The Congressional Black Caucus is not in the business of shutting down the government even though it is just as well positioned numerically to do so as the RHINO Freedom Caucus.

WHAT ABOUT THE WHITE URBAN LIBERALS LIKE NANCY PELOSI?

Another group of elected representatives who never have to worry about opposition candidates are the urban white liberals like Nancy Pelosi herself. I am not familiar enough with Congressional politics to know how such representatives there are. Regardless of the exact number, one presumes there are enough of them from the major cities of the country to be a formidable presence. For example, my own suburban New York district is represented by Nita Lowey who has been in Congress forever, had no opponent in the 2018 election, and now through seniority and the Democratic takeover holds a powerful committee position in the new Congress. She is not uppity nor are her fellow white urban liberals.

2010 Elections

Maddow’s analysis was incomplete. It failed to show why this particular group of Representatives who do not have to worry about opposition candidates acts in a way entirely inconsistent with the way other similar groups of Representatives behave. Nor did it address the diminished status of Lincoln, Roosevelt, Eisenhower, and Reagan in the Republican Party. Nor did address how it came to be that Republicans were in position after the 2010 census to draw such gerrymandered districts so that they could elect Congressional (and state) representatives far in excess of popular vote count.

The missing piece from her analysis was the impact of the 2010 elections, a wave election that substantially benefited the Republican Party. This redistricting did not happen in a vacuum. It occurred in response to other events. Yes, there had been problems with the economy. Yes, America had elected its first bi-racial President. And then there was healthcare.

Remember Nancy Pelosi and the passage of a healthcare? Now that she has returned for second stint as Speaker of House, her accomplishments the first time around are being touted. Foremost among her achievements as a great Speaker is the passage of healthcare legislation. When confronted with Republican obstacles to its passage, she adamantly declared almost eight years ago:

We’ll go through the gate. If the gate’s closed, we’ll go over the fence. If the fence is too high, we’ll pole vault in. If that doesn’t work, we’ll parachute in but we’re going to get health care reform passed for the America people.

Like Churchill voicing the indomitable British will to never surrender, Pelosi exclaimed the Democrats would triumph no matter what wall the Republicans built to prevent them from reaching their goal.

It was at the moment when Pelosi became the poster-person for the condescending arrogant self-righteous elitists, a position she holds to this very day. There is in America a significant portion of the population that adheres to the motto “Don’t tread on me.” These people do not like being told what to do. It is relevant whether or not what they are being told to do is in their own interest. The guiding principle is that they are being told what to do and have no choice but to comply, to obey, to be treated as slaves.  Since colonial times, this segment of the American population has expressed its antipathy to condescending arrogant self-righteous elitists. They hate having no choice and that is what Pelosi told they had: no choice. Then came the elections. Payback.

I get home delivery of the New York Times. I read the paper with two hands, the way people are supposed to get the news.  That means about once every other month, there will be an op-ed piece by Paul Krugman on healthcare. He will praise what it has accomplished, note there is room for improvement, and mock the Republicans for being unable to even develop an alternative of their own despite all their whining and shouting. But what economist Krugman never does is to consider the political costs of healthcare.  He never considers what subsequently happened to the Democratic Party beginning in the 2010 election. While it is easy to blame deplorable white racists who fear losing white privilege, that also is an explanation that makes condescending arrogant self-righteous elitists feel good about themselves. Perhaps instead of telling Don’t-Tread-on-Me Americans what was going to be done to them, they might have started by asking the people what they wanted. Instead, like the Very Stable Genius, they already knew the answer and were ready to force it on people if necessary.

While there may not be a direct connection between Pelosi going over, under, around, and through the wall to prevent healthcare to the 2016 election, it is a major part of the story that helped worsen the divide among Americans that a skilled con artist could exploit. Somehow this spoiled billionaire with no sense of empathy or sympathy has convinced Don’t-Tread-on-Me Americans that he cares about them. Keep in mind though that the Queens boy from the wrong side of the river has his own genuine issues with the elitists from the right side of the river in Manhattan.

Ann Coulter

At the same time that Maddow was omitting all this from her analysis of the government shut down, Ann Coulter, the second woman, offered an alternative view. She expressed how proud she was of her “boys,” apparently not a racially offensive term when used by white people about white people. She exulted in their courage. As a result of their heroic actions, spending was cut and the budget was balanced. At least it was in that timeline. In our timeline, the practical results were non-existent. However, it did enable uppity, rambunctious RHINOs to feel empowered.

So here were are years later with yet another shutdown. In this instance, the shutdown was snatched from the jaws of cooperation. When Fox, Ann, Rush, and the leaders of the RHINO Freedom Caucus read the weeny President the riot act he quickly folded. What had been a professional wrestling arena campaign gimmick suddenly became a hole he was digging himself deeper into. The talking heads are right: whatever compromise should emerge to resolve the situation, the Republican base can be conned into thinking it is a victory. However that may not work with Fox, Ann, Rush, and the RHINO Freedom Caucus. They will be harder to con hence the hardening of the lines.

Now the shutdown ratchets up in intensity threatening to become a national emergency. It may come down to first there being enough Republican Senators to pass the budget legislation and second there being enough the override a veto as well. Come to think of it, that would require the same number of Republican Senators as to remove a President should he be impeached. There is a lot a stake here.

Maybe in the end, Pelosi will not only have helped to elect Trump, she and Ann will have helped to remove him.